LETTERS TO THE EDITOR


No defence for Maidstone Dear Sir – It was after spending an enjoyable afternoon wandering around Faversham’s tranquil and attractive streets in glorious au- tumn sunshine that I came across your lead- ing article where you take issue with a Guardian journalist bewailingwhat they saw as Maidstone’s urban blight – “a town suf- fering from ringroaditis andmediocrity,” not to mention being “overshadowed by fag packet office blocks, retail parks and round- abouts” (“‘Nice’ Maidstone” – November 2012). Not, it has to be said, a terribly flatter- ing description. Perhaps it was this same unnamed hack


who last year spoke of Maidstone as the “Wolverhampton of the south”. Not, I fear, a compliment to either of these places! As someone who has lived here sinceMrs Thatcher’s election victory of 1979, I would have liked to agree with what I felt to be your less than heartfelt defence of the town, but I am afraid the Guardianwriterwas only stat- ing an all too obvious truth. The contrast with Faversham, from which


I had just returned, was sharp and instinc- tive.While clearly a smaller place, less eco- nomically vibrant perhaps, and offering few employment or leisure opportunities for local people, it nevertheless seemed like a placewhose inhabitants actually cared for it: little or no rubbish or chewing gum on the pavements, not at any rate while I was there, none of that depressing down-at-heel air of shabbiness often so evident here. No failed concrete brutalist car parks or


third rate, frequently empty office blocks or nondescript Travelodge hotel or ugly, pre- fabricated warehouse-style retail outlets de- spoiled what might have been, with more imagination, a beautiful riverfront vista. Faversham, by contrast, had an uplifting


effect on my spirit, albeit only temporary! One sensed that, had they made a decision to pave over their high street at enormous cost, local ragstone would have been used in keeping with an historic Kentish town, not imported Chinese granite. Some years ago, when Faversham was threatened with a ringroad scheme similar to that inflicted on Ashford, the proposal was thrown out and “ringroaditis” averted. Those charged with caring for the past, present and future of Faversham have put to shame their counterparts in Maidstone, dis- playing a cultivated intelligence and care not obviously apparent here. One wonders what on earth John Ruskin or his contemporary, the apostle of beauty in the everydayWilliam Morris, or even a high priest of modernism like Denys Lasdun would have made of Maidstone today. Time to move elsewhere perhaps!


K G Banks, Bower Lane, Maidstone


What a transformation Dear Sir – Maidstone town centre has been transformed from a traffic-choked suburban mediocrity into a light, spacious, pedestrian- friendly environment of near continental standards of taste and elegance. All praise to Councillor Greer and his team


formaking it happen. Criticism? Of course! Many a Brit moaner would complain ifmanna fell from heaven. G E French,Marion Crescent, Shepway


Residential parking Dear Sir – This is an open letter to all those councillors who are thinking about putting the car parking costs up in Maidstone. As a resident of Cromwell Road, it has be-


come increasingly difficult to park in our road, even though we pay for permits for


24 South


You can write to us at: Downs Mail, 2 Forge House, Bearsted Green Business Park, Bearsted, Maidstone, ME14 4DT or e-mail: info@downsmail.co.uk


ourselves and our visitors. Cars park all down the path, even next to paths that lead to our houses. It would be impossible for a pram or wheelchair, if one was needed, and what about the emergency services? How would they get to homes in our cul-de-sac? The council wouldn’t listen when we said charging for car parking on Sundays would force people to park on side roads. They also wouldn’t consider allowing residents to park free in the car parks. They would rather cars clogged up our residential streets and made it a misery for people like us! Isn’t it about time they listened to voters? N Cox, Cromwell Road,Maidstone


Threat to our rural roads Dear Sir – Any developments byMBC under its Core Strategy, either at junction 8 of the M20 or along the Sutton Road at Langley, Otham or Boughton Monchelsea, are pie in the sky with the present infrastructure. The B2163 between Leeds Castle and The Plough at Langley is not fit for purpose.Will- ington Street also suffers from excessive traf- fic, which is beginning to spill on to the lanes in Otham, between the Langley road (A274) and the A20. Living on the B2163 means putting up


with overweight lorries which damage the infrastructure (broken water mains, sewers, gas pipe fractures, manhole covers broken), force oncoming traffic up on to pavements and shake old buildings. The police have done little to deal with overweight vehicles, and it should be remembered that lorries ig- noring the weight signs invalidate their in- surance.


Speeding in Leeds is the norm for most motorists, especially in Upper Street. Yet amazingly, the police objected to a build-out at the top of Penfold Hill on “safety grounds”. In November, a pilot LorryWatch scheme was due to start, which would see lorry details taken and reported to the police. This has, in fact, been going on for years, but the police are very selective about who they prosecute. If you asked most people who drive through Leedswhether they would like a by- pass, strategic link or relief road, most would say yes, aswould those who live on the road, people in Willington Street, people on the lanes in Otham etc, and even the KCC and MBC, because with a strategic link between junction 8 and the A274 they could replace a pre-medieval drovers’ road with a road fit for the 21st century.


T JWilliams,Milners, Upper Street, Leeds


Focus onWillington Street Dear Sir – I am writing concerning an aspect in the explanation of Maidstone’s Core Strategy published in your October edi- tion. In the section relating to M20 junction 8,


there is reference to improvements at several points along the Ashford Road in- cluding at its junction with Willington Street. While any proposals for road im- provements are to be welcomed, these pro- posals indicate a clear intention to inflict yet more traffic on Ashford Road andWillington Street and their residents as part of the strat- egy.


Concerns about increased traffic levels


in the area have already been expressed in relation to the junction 7, junction 8 and Langley Park proposals and, as a resident of Willington Street, I share these fears. Willington Street is an inadequately main- tained, unclassified residential road, which already carries far too much high speedHGV


and other traffic. This fact, combined with the failure of Kent Police to make any at- tempt to enforce the traffic laws and regula- tions in the section of Willington Street south of the School Lane junction, has a se- riously adverse effect on the quality of life of residents. As well as the obvious danger from traffic (routinely in breach of the speed limit), there are the added problems of noise and pollu- tion. This situation will only be made worse if yet more traffic is encouraged to use the road – a point that those representing Will- ington Street residents and those responsible for the Core Strategy seem not to care about. Proposals as outlined in the Maidstone


Core Strategy need to be supported by a suit- able road network and notmerely reliant on the existing inadequate network. Of course, the obvious solution to this and many other traffic problems in Maidstone and its sub- urbs is the immediate construction of the South Eastern strategic link road as part of they Core Strategy. It is insufficient for those responsible merely to repeat the mantra that funding is not available. We are now in an economic climate where infrastructure projects should be encouraged. A positive approach to this project by both KCC and Maidstone Borough Council, instead of the current seemingly wilful refusal to contemplate it in the near future, would bring benefits to residents, commerce and Maidstone as awhole, aswell as forming an essential part of the Core Strat- egy.


These are frequently stated issues and I can


only hope that those responsible will listen and act to improve matters within an ac- ceptable time scale.


Charles Lucas,Willington Street, Maidstone


New bins a waste of money Dear Sir – So Maidstone Council is to change our garden waste bins from green to brown (Downs Mail Maidstone edition No. 187). Why? I have had a green (garden) wheelie


bin almost since they were introduced. At one point, a yellow band was stuck around these bins to diffferentiate them from the re- cycling green bins, although they have dif- ferent coloured lids and I doubt if any of the collectors are shorter than the bins and can consequently see the tops. Why this unnecessary expense? If the council wishes to introduce brown bins for gardens, they can retain the green ones and use up those they probably have in stock first. In the meantime, they plan to do away with the (heavily-overpriced) compostable bags.


Although we have a garden bin, we still


need the bags during the summer/autumn months, when there is a great deal of hedg- ing, weeding and mowing to be done. The al- ternative is a trip to Tovil tip with the overflow, since we are not allowed bonfires in our part of our estate and we have nowhere to compost all the stuff on site. I assume that by paying another £30 a year,


we would be allowed a second garden bin, but where on earth does the normal semi keep all these items? And don’t get me started on gypsy families moving in without planning permission. It seems the council will wheel, weave and duck the issue until the end of time. One disappointed Kent dweller (or should


I sign myself like the one-time Disgusted of TunbridgeWells?)


AudreyWilkinson, by email You can e-mail the Downs Mail — info@downsmail.co.uk


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40